Calgary & Alberta Economy

[darwink]

Another fighter fleet to complement the F35, Grippens, Eurofighters or maybe both?

The western gap is in a bomber fleet that is slightly less capable than the new B21 stealth bomber imo, but can handle the ultra long length standoff and medium length cruise missles on mass that the fast jets can only carry one per air frame. Something that can get within 1000 km without needing a huge operation to clear the path. Doesn't need to be perfect, to get over the target to drop a bunker buster, but something in between an arsenal truck like the B52 and a high end stealth of the B21.

I think Canada has a unique need for an aircraft like that to protect sea lanes at ultra long range distances (5000 km), provide an ability to independently project power and contribute meaningfully during the initial phase of a crisis, and perhaps others would buy in small numbers (Australia comes to mind, they have recognized a similar gap for a long time).

With the USA being so random, we can't count on them providing the backbone for an intervention, and the Europeans don't need a similar aircraft. So it is our niche to fill if we want it.

Also much simpler to do when we don't need to source engines from other countries. Fighters are a whole different kettle of fish.

 

[InfrastructureEnthusiast]

There is no chance we'd develop a fighter ourselves. We don't have the engineering and manufacturing capacity to build one, unless we are just going to give away tax revenue on a pet project of no value. Drones are much more interesting and maybe that's one we partner with some more industrial countries to build. We have aerospace talent (mostly in QC), abundant energy and Germany brings the tooling and machinery.

No developing a whole new fighter is a stretch too far for Canada right now, but assembling some Swedish aero-lego should be within reach.

Given that all of their gear is developed with the harsh winter climate in mind, Sweden really should be Canada's go-to when we need to buy foreign.

Biggest downside with the gripen for Canada is its still a single engine fighter, and Canada ha so much more range to cover than the gripen was designed for.

After Pakistan's demonstrated how garbage the rafale is, pretty much leaves the typhoon as the only other dual engine friendly fighter available. Probably more of a buy than build option though.

 

[CalgaryTiger]

slightly less capable than the new B21 stealth bomber

A CANAUS/AUSCAN (and others, South Korea?) joint project would be quite something. A Grey Cup Flyby of the A/C20 Stealth Bomber would easily make me faint.

 

[InfrastructureEnthusiast]

The western gap is in a bomber fleet that is slightly less capable than the new B21 stealth bomber imo, but can handle the ultra long length standoff and medium length cruise missles on mass that the fast jets can only carry one per air frame. Something that can get within 1000 km without needing a huge operation to clear the path. Doesn't need to be perfect, to get over the target to drop a bunker buster, but something in between an arsenal truck like the B52 and a high end stealth of the B21.

I think Canada has a unique need for an aircraft like that to protect sea lanes at ultra long range distances (5000 km), provide an ability to independently project power and contribute meaningfully during the initial phase of a crisis, and perhaps others would buy in small numbers (Australia comes to mind, they have recognized a similar gap for a long time).

With the USA being so random, we can't count on them providing the backbone for an intervention, and the Europeans don't need a similar aircraft. So it is our niche to fill if we want it.

Also much simpler to do when we don't need to source engines from other countries. Fighters are a whole different kettle of fish.

Interesting viewpoint, seems like kamikaze stealth drones or satellites might be the easiest win?

Getting that kind of reach and range takes a lot of logistics that I'm not sure Canada could support. USAF can do what they do with bombers because they have even more flying gas stations available.

 

[darwink]

Interesting viewpoint, seems like kamikaze stealth drones or satellites might be the easiest win?

Getting that kind of reach and range takes a lot of logistics that I'm not sure Canada could support. USAF can do what they do with bombers because they have even more flying gas stations available.

At 3.5% of GDP spend, thinking about what capabilities we can gain is important. Right now everything can be accomodated in the 2% bucket -- the new submarines, fighter air craft, navy destroyers. What is useful to us and our likely allies, thats the next 1.5%.

Admiral Topshee (head of the navy) explained that the big capabilities we need to buy are things we can't realistically procure during the first 2 years of a conflict and that would be useful during the first two years of a conflict. Potentially, and hopefully, having those capabilities contribute to not having the conflict at all by increasing the cost of aggression, and by diversifying the deterrence further beyond the potentially unreliable and random USA.

Big opportunities coming. Realistically for our partnership with europe, we should be looking at the most energy intensive part of processes (move the processes to energy, instead of energy to the processes), and the hardest to replace processes (Canada already leads on military grade optical sensors, communications hardware and computer processors) where a single plant in europe being wiped out would wipe out 100s of production lines due to a lack of inputs.

While we might end up with some new full production lines, we shouldn't ignore the boring parts of the supply chain just because they aren't as flashy.